Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.